If Willian was bought for the reason to give cover for RB and good workrate/defensive skills and pressing? Don't we already have Ramires for that (although he is inferior I know)? But why spend 30m pounds for a player when we already have Ramires for that? Just to bench him?

 

If we would have paid 15m for him I would have been happy with his contribution but attacking wise it would still well be way below par.

 

And if you're paying 30million pounds for an attacking mid/winger you would definitely expect him to win games on his own or put decent performances on a regular basis. But Willian is far, I mean far from that.

 

People praise him just because of his discipline, defensive work, work rate etc. Yeah its good but he's no central midfielder. He's a winger! His attacking output is too low even lower than a defender.

 

This guy's attacking impact is way way below from being acceptable. I doubt it will going to improve. He's just a workhorse that's it. Who just runs and runs and runs etc. He can't score, nor can't assist, look at his chances created it's nowhere near of the players who costed the same.

 

And he's 26 years old already he's not even young.

 

Do you seriously think he doesn't deserve the criticism? Really?

 

6 goals and 5 assists in about 60 games for a 30million pounds winger. And if it doesn't deserve criticism then my god.

 

I know I'm getting bit over the top but still it's reality.

 

2 things that the people seem to ignore with Willian. 

 

1) Opponents get very little time on the ball, he is absolutely key to our pressing game

2) I’m sorry but how many wingers do you know that are going to cover as much as he does for the marauding Ivan who by the way is in less and less of a hurry to get back these days.

 

 

Nobody ignores that. Everyone is aware of the argument about how much work he does defensively, but EVERY player (bar Hazard and Costa) does that in our team. Fabregas, Matic and Oscar are probably the hardest-working midfielders in the league and Schurrle puts in a great shift as well. 

 

Not sure about the pop at Ivanovic who does a massive amount of work defensively as well as providing almost all of out width on the right-flank. 

 

Simple fact is that Willian's defensive contribution is massively overrated because his attacking contribution is utterly woeful. 

Edited December 15, 201411 yr by Blue Daze

some of the arguments put across here have less balance than steven gerrard.

 

I like willian. keeps the ball well, defends well, presses extremely well. 

 

obviously it would be better if he had the instinct for goals (and positioning) that schurrle does, but even without it he's the superior player in my view. though schurrle is also a very handy player in his own right.

 

there are, I think, limitations to the 'goals and assists' representation of footballers. I think above all it ignores the context of the side within which one is judged.

 

it is a fact (if we're to use blue daze's factually incorrect usage of the word) that a team will attack through its best attacking player(s). in our case that means fabregas and hazard. with and without the ball every other player has to adapt to that reality in terms of movement and positioning on the pitch. I think in most cases this makes willian a) hugely important and b) it understandable that he won't win you many points in fantasy football.  how therefore one could unfavourably compare him to the likes of coutinho (a player so lightweight that it appears his boots are made of helium) I'll never know.

it is a fact (if we're to use blue daze's factually incorrect usage of the word) that a team will attack through its best attacking player(s). 

 

If you're going to nitpick then it's best to be beyond reproach in your response. This isn't a fact. Your best attacking player may not be your best source of an attack on a given day. In fact teams will look to nullify your 'best attacking player(s)' meaning you need other outlets and it's then that Willian's lack of creative output it exposed.

 

The best strategy for attack is to have a multi-faceted approach isn't it? I won't say that's a fact, I'll just ask the question.

So now the excuse is that Hazard and Fabregas are our best attacking outlets and because of them Willian doesn't score goals or get assists?

I'd maybe buy into that but why then does Schurrle manage to directly contribute to more goals playing alongside the same players?

I think it is being misconstrued that saying Willian isn't an effective attacking outlet is equal to saying he is a bad player and so the counter argument mainly becomes about defending his overall ability but I have yet to see an argument that justifies his inability to put up the kind of numbers in terms of goals and assist that players in the same role, in similar sides manage.

I would venture that the likes of Walcott, Sterling, Nani, Valencia, James Milner, Navas and Podolski have put up similar, if not better numbers despite costing a fraction of the amount Willian did.

So now the excuse is that Hazard and Fabregas are our best attacking outlets and because of them Willian doesn't score goals or get assists?

I'd maybe buy into that but why then does Schurrle manage to directly contribute to more goals playing alongside the same players?

I think it is being misconstrued that saying Willian isn't an effective attacking outlet is equal to saying he is a bad player and so the counter argument mainly becomes about defending his overall ability but I have yet to see an argument that justifies his inability to put up the kind of numbers in terms of goals and assist that players in the same role, in similar sides manage.

I would venture that the likes of Walcott, Sterling, Nani, Valencia, James Milner, Navas and Podolski have put up similar, if not better numbers despite costing a fraction of the amount Willian did.

 

 

It's not an excuse. I think G4 has conceded as have I  and many other's that Willian should score more goals and we wish he would display more of a killer instinct. But we also believe (in our opinion) that Willians contribution to the team over the course of a season is greater, or at least his contribution to our team. 

 

to my earlier point for example, that got mocked regarding Ivan (who i rate highly) Pick any game to re-watch with both on the same pitch and make a point of counting the ammount of times Willian is back there covering for, that doesn't happen on our other wing. 

 

But please lets not focus on that. I think we win the midfield battle more often then not when Willian is on the pitch, Ball retention is better, he spreads the ball well and puts in a decent if not quite world class delivery. 

 

Yes when he lays the ball of I'm screaming at him to make a gut busting run in to the box and give a return option and more often then not it doesn't happen and it drives me nuts. Andre does that well but unfortunately all the other stuff Willian does better, a lot better. in my opinion any way

FC - just to put the stats up for you - and thye are only based on PL games Willian comes in at half way, purly statistical which I feel is more for statisticians then football fans 

 

  Games Goals   Navas 46 4 9% Nani 147 25 17% Willian 41 5 12% Sterling 76 14 18% Wallcot 196 45 23% Valencia 142 13 9% Millner 94 6 6%

If Jose wanted goals/assists, he would have kept Mata. Jose knew what he was getting, he didn't flop, it's just some of us had much higher expectations of him, especially after the 2 games he had against us 2 seasons ago.

If you're going to nitpick then it's best to be beyond reproach in your response. This isn't a fact

 

yes. I know. nor is the following a fact: "Simple fact is that Willian's defensive contribution is massively overrated because his attacking contribution is utterly woeful."

 

that was the point.

 

 

 

The best strategy for attack is to have a multi-faceted approach isn't it? I won't say that's a fact, I'll just ask the question.

 

I think you're implying a false dichotomy. of course it is better to have multiple solutions. fortunately there has never been a mourinho team that could only win a match one way. this one is no different. ironically willian is one of the players that is able to adapt to different styles. juan mata out of the context of our squad, manager and preferred attacking style is a better player. unfortunately he is also not a player who can adapt to multiple styles.

 

the point remains: generally, teams will attack through their best players. many players go to barcelona (for example) and fail (or don't meet expectations) because they cannot adapt to the game going through messi and not them. ibrahimovic is plainly a better footballer than pedro. for barcelona though, pedro was and is a better component within that team.

 

So now the excuse is that Hazard and Fabregas are our best attacking outlets and because of them Willian doesn't score goals or get assists?

I'd maybe buy into that but why then does Schurrle manage to directly contribute to more goals playing alongside the same players?

 

as has been said- goals and assists don't really come close to the sum of the contribution of a footballer- even an attacking player in certain cases.

 

its horses for courses anyway. they aren't like for like. with schurrle you know you'll get an extra body when the ball goes into the box, a finisher with great movement without the ball. willian never scores that goal at city this season. salah doesn't and I don't think hazard would either. on the other hand schurrle will never retain the ball or interchange with the other attackers like willian. he won't do as well defensively and he's relatively average in terms of technique.

I think it is being misconstrued that saying Willian isn't an effective attacking outlet is equal to saying he is a bad player and so the counter argument mainly becomes about defending his overall ability but I have yet to see an argument that justifies his inability to put up the kind of numbers in terms of goals and assist that players in the same role, in similar sides manage.

I would venture that the likes of Walcott, Sterling, Nani, Valencia, James Milner, Navas and Podolski have put up similar, if not better numbers despite costing a fraction of the amount Willian did.

 

playing out wide doesn't mean you do the same thing. how anyone could look at milner, walcott and sterling and think they are three options who offer the same thing is something I don't understand. each of those three players are different and I rate them all but I certainly wouldn't want 3 milners or 3 walcotts behind a striker, whatever numbers they produce. I think milner, valencia and in some respects navas are comparable to willian in what they offer to their sides. I think I'd take willian over all of them.

 

schurrle on the other hand is comparable to walcott, podolski and players like ljungberg and even the way poyet was used by vialli to some degree. 

 

t

Edited December 16, 201411 yr by g3.7

Opinion = / = fact

I don't think there is anything to suggest Willian is Jose's first choice yet.

Well the fact that Willian has started 11 of our 16 BPL games (including the last 5 in a row) plus 4 subs, and 4 of our 6 CL games would strongly suggest that Willian is JM's first choice.

-----

We had an AM that was great at creating and scoring goals, Mata.  However the team got better by removing those goals/assists and replacing it with more industrious talents as we have plenty of goals in the team.

 

You can talk about AM's that get you assists and goals, personally I'd rather an AM who helps us collect maximum points.  Does anyone here care how many goals and assists a specific player has when we win the league?  Does anyone feel better knowing a specific AM got a lot of assists and goals when we don't win the league?

 

Willian contribution is no where near that of other players for 30mil or more?  Really?  Some sure, but how about the likes of Andy Carrol? Lamela?  Torres? Veron? Ozil? Lallana? Fellaini?  Schevchenko?  Just off the top of my head for players around that range, some a bit less some a lot more.  I'd take Willian as the best success of any of the above mentioned after their big moves and I suspect that if we evaluated Willian against all BPL imports who went for similar money, he comes out in the top half in terms of bang for your buck.

 

Should Willian score more?  It'd be nice but I suspect we'd see a direct result of us conceding more.  Im a huge Ivanovic fan, said years ago that he rivals Terry for being our most consistent and best defender.  However, if youve payed attention to this season, you'll notice that Ivan is oftern further up the pitch than Willian and often its Willian who is back fastest to defend on that flank.  I love Ivan, but he has gotten it into his head that he is the best scorer on the team behing Costa and it is reflecting negatively in his defencive duties.  Dont believe me?  Start watching some of our games this season again, especially when we are down or need a goal.  A person watching us for the first time could easily, at times, think that Ivan is our LW and Willian our LB.

 

and sorry Carefree, dont mean to pick on you, but what does possession mean if you cant do anything with it?  It means the other team doesnt have the ball and thus cant do anything with it either, and when you have players like Costa/Hazard/Fabregas in your team, its a freaking beautiful thing because Willian can just pass to them and they certainly can do something with it.

Well the fact that Willian has started 11 of our 16 BPL games (including the last 5 in a row) plus 4 subs, and 4 of our 6 CL games would strongly suggest that Willian is JM's first choice.

That kind of glosses over the fact that during that period Schurrle had been unavailable to start games due to the virus he had.

As I said before, start of the season with all his players 100% fit, Schurrle, the last player to return from the World Cup was first choice.

So because other players that cost £30m+ were unsuccessful we aren't allowed to want/expect more from Willian?

Statistics don't tell a full story but Willian isn't exactly shot shy but his conversion rate is poor compared to those around him and he makes he makes less a lot less forward passes than his fellow attacking players.

He's an extremely frustrating player because good attacking situations consistently break down due to his poor passing, decision making or just wanting too much time on the ball.

For me, all the running around and pressing doesn't compensate for Willian's short comings in the attacking third.

That kind of glosses over the fact that during that period Schurrle had been unavailable to start games due to the virus he had.

As I said before, start of the season with all his players 100% fit, Schurrle, the last player to return from the World Cup was first choice.

So because other players that cost £30m+ were unsuccessful we aren't allowed to want/expect more from Willian?

Statistics don't tell a full story but Willian isn't exactly shot shy but his conversion rate is poor compared to those around him and he makes he makes less a lot less forward passes than his fellow attacking players.

He's an extremely frustrating player because good attacking situations consistently break down due to his poor passing, decision making or just wanting too much time on the ball.

For me, all the running around and pressing doesn't compensate for Willian's short comings in the attacking third.

 

 

I actually think Shurrle ruins more of our attacking opportunity in a direct comparison. I think in lead up play Andre's decision making and ability on the ball can let us down. It's just the last movement in the box i'd credit him with. 

 

I'd agree that Andre looked to be first choice the first couple of games of the season, but I also think he blew it with some poor performances. Benefit of the dowbt, lets say he had a virus early. The rest of the season will give us an indication as to who Jose trusts more. 

What we need is for one of those crazy scientists to invent a machine where you put both Willian and Schurrle in it and press a button and hey presto, out come Wurrle and Schillian. We keep Schillian who has the best abilities of both and can dribble, close down, track back and score goals out of nothing. Wurrle on the other hand will be absolutely f**king hopeless and we sell him to Liverpool for £20M which will go some way to getting our own back for the Torres saga.

What we need is for one of those crazy scientists to invent a machine where you put both Willian and Schurrle in it and press a button and hey presto, out come Wurrle and Schillian. We keep Schillian who has the best abilities of both and can dribble, close down, track back and score goals out of nothing. Wurrle on the other hand will be absolutely f**king hopeless and we sell him to Liverpool for £20M which will go some way to getting our own back for the Torres saga.

If you think about the player you have just described (the good one) it reminds me very much of a prime Joe Cole.. I'm probably in the company of about 4 with that thought though

I just don't get it how can you defend an attacking (Winger) who costed 30 f**king millions pounds just for his defensive work and retaining ball from opponents. He's not a goddamn fullback.

 

It's like defending Torres who costed 50m pounds and scored as much as a defender still says he does plays well for the team despite not scoring.

 

Look at the stats. He's nowhere near any of the players like Sterling, Reus, Sanchez even in defensive work. Such a nothing player. Absolute waste of 30m. He's not even a 15m player.

 

http://www.squawka.com/comparison-matrix#premier_league/2014/2015/raheem_sterling/126/126/534/0/p|premier_league/2014/2015/willian/126/126/7145/0/p|bundesliga/2014/2015/marco_reus/129/129/131/0/p|premier_league/2014/2015/alexis_sánchez/126/126/1581/0/p#attack_score/defence_score/tackles_won/interceptions/clearances/chances_created/successful_take_ons/assists/key_passes#total

I think you're implying a false dichotomy. of course it is better to have multiple solutions. fortunately there has never been a mourinho team that could only win a match one way. this one is no different. ironically willian is one of the players that is able to adapt to different styles. juan mata out of the context of our squad, manager and preferred attacking style is a better player. unfortunately he is also not a player who can adapt to multiple styles.

 

 

This is already becoming a very boring discussion about semantics rather than football. I actually don't think Willian is as versatile as is made out and as I stated earlier, his 'workrate' and 'defensive contributions' to the team are often exaggerated to mask his lack of goals, assists and incisive passing.

 

I also wonder how much people's opinion of him is coloured by his occasional chasing down of the keeper - at least twice a match he seems to run towards the keeper as he's about to clear the ball and it almost always receives applause. I think notable moments like that make people think he's some terrier racing around the pitch when in reality he doesn't work that much harder than many other players on the park.

 

We had an AM that was great at creating and scoring goals, Mata.  However the team got better by removing those goals/assists and replacing it with more industrious talents as we have plenty of goals in the team.

 

You can talk about AM's that get you assists and goals, personally I'd rather an AM who helps us collect maximum points.  Does anyone here care how many goals and assists a specific player has when we win the league?  Does anyone feel better knowing a specific AM got a lot of assists and goals when we don't win the league?

 

 

Now if you want to talk about false dichotomies....wowzer!

 

So the choice is goals and assists or points....tough one. Is there some kind of clubcard exchange programme where I can trade in goals for points?

 

 

 

 

Willian contribution is no where near that of other players for 30mil or more?  Really?  Some sure, but how about the likes of Andy Carrol? Lamela?  Torres? Veron? Ozil? Lallana? Fellaini?  Schevchenko?  Just off the top of my head for players around that range, some a bit less some a lot more.  I'd take Willian as the best success of any of the above mentioned after their big moves and I suspect that if we evaluated Willian against all BPL imports who went for similar money, he comes out in the top half in terms of bang for your buck.

 

 

Blimey you're a glass half-full chap aren't you. See my first thought of a right-winger who cost about £30 million was Alexis Sanchez, a guy who has 9 goals, 5 assists and works his bollocks off in matches. 

 

Offensive and defensive contributions are not mutually exclusive. It is possible for a player to work hard helping to get the ball back and then do something with it when he has it, especially when he has Branislav Ivanovic covering his wing for him.

 

 

 

Should Willian score more?  It'd be nice but I suspect we'd see a direct result of us conceding more.  Im a huge Ivanovic fan, said years ago that he rivals Terry for being our most consistent and best defender.  However, if youve payed attention to this season, you'll notice that Ivan is oftern further up the pitch than Willian and often its Willian who is back fastest to defend on that flank.  I love Ivan, but he has gotten it into his head that he is the best scorer on the team behing Costa and it is reflecting negatively in his defencive duties.  Dont believe me?  Start watching some of our games this season again, especially when we are down or need a goal.  A person watching us for the first time could easily, at times, think that Ivan is our LW and Willian our LB.

 

 

Willian doesn't cover Ivanovic as you've people suggested. When we're attacking Cahill comes across, Terry sits in the middle and Azpi stays back with Matic filling a hole approximately halfway between him and Hazard. If the opposition counters then Ivanovic works his bollocks off to get back.

 

That's from me watching our matches this season. Willian actually has a pretty cushy ride in the team. He has Costa doing a massive amount of pressing up top, he has possibly the hardest-working midfield trio behind him (Matic, Oscar and Fabregas) who track back magnificently, sit deeper than him in attacks and even contribute a fantastic amount of incisive passes and outside of him he has Ivanovic who is an absolute machine on the right-flank.

 

That gives Willian so much freedom as an old-fashioned inside-right player yet he's got just one goal and one assist all season. Schurrle has got two goals in one-third of the minutes.

Edited December 16, 201411 yr by Blue Daze

This is already becoming a very boring discussion about semantics rather than football. I actually don't think Willian is as versatile as is made out and as I stated earlier, his 'workrate' and 'defensive contributions' to the team are often exaggerated to mask his lack of goals, assists and incisive passing.

I also wonder how much people's opinion of him is coloured by his occasional chasing down of the keeper - at least twice a match he seems to run towards the keeper as he's about to clear the ball and it almost always receives applause.

My opinion is based on watching him live for a season and a half.

And from that time my conclusion is that he's our best option in that position, that there is scope for improvement, that we could sign a better player but it wouldn't be easy, that he's got a great big game temperament and finally that his transfer fee is an irrelevance. Oh and also that Jose keeps picking him might suggest he thinks he's making a valuable contribution.

My opinion is based on watching him live for a season and a half.

 

 

And how much do you think every other supporter who has an opinion on him has spent watching him?

 

Personally I watched him a fair few times for Shakhtar before he came to this club and like others who saw him for more than a season and a half pointed out, this is nothing new for him. He's never been a consistent attacking force.

 

And from that time my conclusion is that he's our best option in that position, that there is scope for improvement, that we could sign a better player but it wouldn't be easy, that he's got a great big game temperament and finally that his transfer fee is an irrelevance. Oh and also that Jose keeps picking him might suggest he thinks he's making a valuable contribution.

 

A lot of us would like to see Schurrle given more games but he's been seemingly hampered by an illness that put him out of contention for selection (to answer the rather snide last point).

 

His transfer fee isn't an irrelevance in a football world where FFP is a reality either, and it is perhaps unfair on him that he cost so much which raises people's expectations but Hazard cost roughly the same and no-one is complaining.

I think he's underrated, but he's not the strongest in the final third. honestly, i regret that we never put that 30 million paid for willian towards a young player like barkley. £40 million for barkley and we would have a young, english player for the next 10 years. 

Edited December 16, 201411 yr by enigma

The thing about Schurrle is that while he has more end product then Willian and better movement in the final third, everything else is really, really poor. His touch, passing and dribbling is at a level were he is a huge liability when he has an off day and if he doesnt score, he contributes very little

As for Willian, his transfer fee is a sunken cost. At this point in time, it doesnt matter what we bought him for.

And how much do you think every other supporter who has an opinion on him has spent watching him?

 

I suspect that a lot of people who undervalue him haven't watched him in the flesh- at least not on a consistent basis. some players really need that to be fully appreciated imo. crespo, makelele, cech etc. players where much of what makes them good happens when the television cameras don't necessarily pick them up or aren't able to provide a good context for what they are doing. willian is one of them I think.

 

 

A lot of us would like to see Schurrle given more games but he's been seemingly hampered by an illness that put him out of contention for selection (to answer the rather snide last point).

 

how is it snide? jose has had the option of using ramires, schurrle, salah or remy out wide rather than willian. I think almost all would offer more in terms of 'quantifiable' attacking output. despite this, he hasn't- why? if anyone's being disingenuous it is you for the implication that is is either willian or schurrle and willian is getting picked only because of andre's intermittent unavailability.

 

His transfer fee isn't an irrelevance in a football world where FFP is a reality either, and it is perhaps unfair on him that he cost so much which raises people's expectations but Hazard cost roughly the same and no-one is complaining.

I think it is an irrelevance in as much as I don't think there is a point judging a player relative to his cost. firstly he doesn't decide his transfer fee. secondly I would hope you expect the same of azpilicueta as you would luis despite cesar costing half as much. if they're in the team you should judge them based on their contribution to the team rather than some arbitrary figure. thirdly do we actually truly know what these players cost? do we know whether the press figure around willian is in pounds or euros? or what the agent was paid to facilitate the move? or perhaps we should judge them relative to their wage? but then, honestly, do we know what that is? do we give free transfers a free ride?

 

I think what this thread shows is a change in the behaviour of football supporters as a result of the internet in large part. we're drowning in largely unhelpful statistical information and drawing conclusions about players in a top trumps sort of way- a lot of evaluation seems to done about players not teams and done using the appropriation of statistics rather than with nuanced observation or insight. to me it is a weird irony because instinctively I would think that more information would lead to more informed debate / analysis but often I don't feel that what I read supports that.

I suspect that a lot of people who undervalue him haven't watched him in the flesh- at least not on a consistent basis. some players really need that to be fully appreciated imo. crespo, makelele, cech etc. players where much of what makes them good happens when the television cameras don't necessarily pick them up or aren't able to provide a good context for what they are doing. willian is one of them I think.

 

Seen him play many times in the flesh....on a consistent basis and everything. Hasn't changed my opinion.

 

how is it snide? jose has had the option of using ramires, schurrle, salah or remy out wide rather than willian. I think almost all would offer more in terms of 'quantifiable' attacking output. despite this, he hasn't- why? if anyone's being disingenuous it is you for the implication that is is either willian or schurrle and willian is getting picked only because of andre's intermittent unavailability.

 

Ramires has been injured for a while now and Remy certainly doesn't have the defensive nous to play there. Schurrle simply hasn't looked up to snuff and that seems to be because of some illness that dates back to the summer. He's had good games and poor, but his contribution in an attacking sense is way above Willian's (always has been). I think he can do a job on the defensive side of the ball too but he'd need time.

 

I think it is an irrelevance in as much as I don't think there is a point judging a player relative to his cost.

 

But we do. Torres was a flop because he cost so much, Sidwell was a shot in the dark and didn't really have a downside. What the price relates to is essentially the opportunity cost of committing these resources to this player. There's also this envy football supporters have when they see Arsenal snapping someone like Sanchez up for roughly the same (reported) fee, although I'm sure he earns more in wages.

 

I think what this thread shows is a change in the behaviour of football supporters as a result of the internet in large part. we're drowning in largely unhelpful statistical information and drawing conclusions about players in a top trumps sort of way- a lot of evaluation seems to done about players not teams and done using the appropriation of statistics rather than with nuanced observation or insight. to me it is a weird irony because instinctively I would think that more information would lead to more informed debate / analysis but often I don't feel that what I read supports that.

 

Fantastically patronising post that doesn't bear much resemblance to my experience of supporting a football club. I see plenty of people who go to matches and don't think his end product is up to much. The stats simply back that up. I think you've got a very myopic, somewhat superior view of arguments that don't align with your's which I would guess has something to do with your age which I'm assuming (based on your posting style) is around 23, probably not too long out of uni. 

 

That's not a slight, simply an observation.

 

What stats allow us to do is to look at football in a different way and quite often provide a little ballast to an existing view. People don't conclude Willian doesn't offer enough in an attacking sense because his stats are sh*t, they can see that on the pitch when he makes bad decisions. Likewise people shouldn't assume a guy running around the pitch is a defensive workhorse when it's actually fairly ineffective. 

clearly we won't agree and I'm happy to accept I won't convince you.

 

all I can do is offer an opinion- willian is underrated by some and has been a good signing- and give my reasons as to why I think that is.

 

you don't need to offer an insult and say it isn't- firstly I can take it and secondly maybe it suggests a nerve was touched? it was a general observation that goes beyond you or this forum even. but I am fairly convinced of it. if you think back even as little as ten years I think that stats played a far less important rhetorical role. I think the increased accessibility to all kinds of data like that has led to this warped kind of point scoring where people look for this knockout blow of factual 'proof' through (often unconscious) manipulation of statistics. as a result I think you get two oppositional sides with increasingly entrenched  viewpoints in the belief that The Truth is on their side. I don't really find that stimulating. 

 

 

 

If you think about the player you have just described (the good one) it reminds me very much of a prime Joe Cole.. I'm probably in the company of about 4 with that thought though

 

if joe was quicker and made more runs in behind (which I suspect he would have done if he were quicker) then yeah. it's a shame people (who don't support chelsea at least) are already forgetting how good he was and prefer to romanticise the flawed player at west ham. for me the only 'what if' question about joe cole is 'what if he didn't have those terrible injuries when he had truly found himself as a footballer?' 40 more caps for england and one or two trophies more for us I reckon...

Schurrle is the better attacking option and Willian is the better defensive option.  Therefore you would think they could be used on a 'horses for courses' basis and maybe would have been mroe often if Schuirrle hadn't had injury problems.

 

if I was forced to choose one of the two or spend a life listening to Kajagoogoo then I think Willian is the better choice of the two on the grounds that he offers something in both areas of the pitch, he is the more consistent of the two and because we already have a lot of creativity in Oscar, Hazard, Fabregas and even Matic.  Given that I can see why Jose would favour Willian's defensive qualities, and the fact he applies them far up the field.

 

If I was being brutally honest it is the one area of the pitch where, if we were looking to spend big money, we would probably look to target a signing.  It really depends how much the club is looking to continually improve by tweaking.  It is probably the only area of the pitch where I would say City, Utd and Arsenal are stronger than us.

 

As for Barak claiming the fusion of the two is Joe Cole, well that was just an attempt to get a ticket to Nibs's New Year party.